Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: apprentice preference in Makwana Mukeshbhai Laxmanbhai vs M/O Railways on 19 June, 2025Matching Fragments
These guidelines inter-alia provided that a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct recruits and a trainee would not be required to get his name sponsored by any employment exchange. Lastly, it was also observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that concerned Training Institute would maintain a register of persons trained year-wise and that the persons trained earlier would be treated as senior to the persons trained later.
2.5 Thereafter, in pursuance to the above direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Railway Board vide OM dated 26.08.1996 framed guidelines for recruitment of CCAAs in the Railway Establishment and subsequently the Railway Board had also issued OM dated 13.07.1999 which stipulated that candidates who had completed the course of training in the relevant trade in the Railway establishment will be given preference over candidates who were not such an Act Apprentice for recruitment to Group D posts.
These guidelines inter-alia provided that a trained apprentice should be given preference over direct recruits and a trainee would not be required to get his name sponsored by any employment exchange.
3.2 Further, learned counsel while relying on the Section 22 of the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 submitted that the said section provides that after successful completion of Apprenticeship training, the employer shall, on completion of training, be bound to offer suitable employment to the Apprentices and the Apprentices shall be bound to serve the employer in that capacity for such period and on such remuneration as decided from time to time.
4.2 It is not factually correct that judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Uttar Pradesh Parivahan Nigam Shishukha Berozgar Sangh, laid down provisions and guidelines for placement of the CCAAs after completion of training. However, it merely stipulated that other things being equal apprentices should be given preference and it further recommends for other benefits like exemption from name in employment exchange, age relaxation etc. 4.3 It was also contended that Act apprentices were engaged as substitutes in Group D under the administrative exigencies in terms of Railway Board's letter dated 21.06.2004 (RBE No. 136/2004) which is not only restricted for engagement of Act Apprentices in Railways, but, in administrative exigencies, and the GM has the discretion to engage any one fulfilling the eligibility conditions as laid down in Railway Board's letter dated 17.09.2010.
4.5 Thereafter, the said Section 22 (i) of the said Act was amended by the parliament vide the Apprentice (Amendment) Act, 2014, whereby, the Section 22 (i) of the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 now reads as under:-
"Every employer shall formulate its own policy for recruiting any apprentice who has completed period of Apprenticeship training in his establishment."
4.6 Accordingly, in terms of the above amendment, the Railway Board has rightly formulated its own policy for recruitment of Apprentices by giving preference to CCAAs to the extent of 20 per cent of the vacancies in case of direct recruitment to posts/categories in Pay band-1 of Rs. 5200-20200 having GP of Rs. 1800/-.